Police cracking down on speeding

Submitted: Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 19:58
ThreadID: 108035 Views:3898 Replies:23 FollowUps:78
This Thread has been Archived
My old man recently had to do a driver safety course. (Got caught being a naughty boy). Part of the course, which was run by the Police, involved speeding. How long it stops at certain speed, speed limits etc.
The discussion came up about going over the limit when overtaking.
While it has always been illegal, apparently it has been instructed to the highway patrol to enforce it. The officer running the course mentioned that he would take each case as it came, he commented that there were at least two around the Wagga area getting people for small amounts over.

They could have made a years salary off the clowns who went around me this afternoon.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Bigfish - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 20:41

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 20:41
Absolutely nothing to do with road safety. The govt has an easy target with road users and relies on making millions of dollars from them, under the guise of road safety, for general revenue. Coppers are merely puppets carrying out the orders of their superiors who answer to the crooked pollies. How many people would be killed a year if everyone overtook someone sitting on 95 kph and staying under the 100 k limi?. Common sense has once again been abandoned. Cops have a quota to reach every week and this is just another easy way of reaching it. The less time spent on the wrong side of the road the safer you are!!!! Except in Queersland where you are allowed to overtake on double lines so as to give a pushbike rider a meters clearance. Absolute stupidity from the newman idiot party...

AnswerID: 533516

Follow Up By: Shaker - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:15

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:15
You aren't allowed to cross double lines in Victoria to pass cyclists.

If you stay behind a vehicle that is doing 95kmh in a 100 zone for 1 hour, you will have lost under 5 minutes, hardly life changing!

1
FollowupID: 816896

Follow Up By: Nutta - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 23:06

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 23:06
So Shaker, when someone is driving slower than you at what speed do you pass them? Obviously 5 kph doesn't bother you, what does??
0
FollowupID: 816901

Follow Up By: bigden - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 23:39

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 23:39
its easy, dont break the law and you dont get booked.
if the limit says 100kph then thats what you do. i dont understand the problem
1
FollowupID: 816902

Follow Up By: TTTSA - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 11:18

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 11:18
Why do you need to overtake someone doing 95 in a 100 zone???


0
FollowupID: 816925

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:23

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:23
Its not a matter of "don't break the law and you don't get booked" or loosing five minutes is it?
If situations change for what ever reason while your on the wrong side of the road, and accelerating over the speed limit is the safer option, you shouldn't be prosecuted for avoiding a dangerous situation????
Maybe its just me, but I make an honest attempt to drive with in the law, but being human I have on occasions, accidently crept over the speed limit and have twice in my life been fined for it. It hasn't changed my driving style as it was an accident and if anything, made me now concentrate on my speed more than what's going on around me??????Hardley a safer approach is it?
I agree Bigfish, purely revenue raising and nothing else......if fining people for human error or not obeying a law that isn't the most practical thing to do at a particular time was for our own safety, why are there so many accidents still?

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 816932

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:49

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:49
"if fining people for human error or not obeying a (*DRACONIAN*) law that isn't the most practical thing to do at a particular time was for our own safety, why are there so many accidents still?"

Allowing people to be fined going 1, 2 or 3 ks over is an a$$ of a law.
Anyone that says they never go over is kidding themselves, or being a danger to others by not watching the road and surrounds, but their speedos all the time !!

Heck, sometimes you MUST for safety go under posted limits . . . weather, traffic volume, pedestrians, bikes, school hours, etc.

They've taken away the right to drive to conditions and common sense, and instead of enforcing already adequate laws, altered them to suit the lowest common denominator (the knuckeheads to speed and can't read a road / conditions, or can't drive to save themselves).

I feel GOVCO just aims for the revenue with the speed kills line, then change laws to suit when it isn't meeting their needs . . . ie drop the tolerance levels, and change speed zones that are perfectly safe at say 60 and drop them to 50 . . . opens up the way for a whole new range of 'clients'. :/

Sure speed kills, but let's be realistic, it's excessive, repetitive, or ongoing speed that is the issue, along with all the list of things people do that is as much (or more) of an issue . . . texting, hand phone use, impatience, aggressive driving, lane hopping / weaving, red light running, fatigue, general distractions, and of course drink / drug driving . . . this list isn't comprehensive, there would be others you could add.
0
FollowupID: 816938

Follow Up By: Idler Chris - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:21

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:21
The "knuckleheads" and the "can't drive to save themselves" are the people coming the other way. I am glad that "They've taken away the right to drive to conditions and common sense" because these people do not have any common sense let along being able to decide what are the right driving conditions. I do not want to be mixed up in some other idiots bad judgements. There is an old saying that it is better to arrive a bit later than not at all.
What other people think of me is none of my business.
Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 816942

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:39

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:39
Where do you live Chris? And remind me not to go there...... Where I live, the knuckle heads are the minority and common sense is still used some of the time..............
0
FollowupID: 816943

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:39

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:39
What I'm saying Chris, is that there are (were) plenty of laws to deal with the knuckleheads PRIOR to introducing MORE DRACONIAN laws, but GOVCO don't provide the resources (police on the roads / beat) to deal them out already.

Instead, they try and drag everyone down to a level that is too fixed and over the top. (Oh yeah, as a side effect they do get a lot of extra revenue though from those normally law abiding citizens.)

The knuckleheads still take risks, and don't know how to drive / handle / read situations properly.
1
FollowupID: 816944

Follow Up By: Top End Az - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 16:08

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 16:08
Try overtaking a roadtrain and keeping to the speed limit. Agree with Hairy (NT). The cops in the NT have common sense and have other issues to worry about such as seatbelts, drink driving and road worthiness of vehicles. Going a few kph over the limit for a short period of time to safely overtake a vehicle is preferable to a head on collision.
0
FollowupID: 816948

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:00

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:00
Sure Shaker but sometimes you're stuck behind a vehicle which does 50kph up a hill, 100 down it and 90 along the flat - all with minimal overtaking opportunities. Drivers of such vehicles obviously should have some courtesy but when they don't sometimes you just might need to hit that 105 to ensure you aren't part of the inevitable train they have behind them. Common sense applies.
0
FollowupID: 817003

Follow Up By: Idler Chris - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:26

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:26
Bazooka. Sorry but common sense does not apply. Laws must be absolutely clear ie. black and white. As we all know common sense is not that common. While I accept that you have the ability to pass the vehicle you describe very safely, unfortunately not all road users have the same abilities as you. So laws have to cover the lowest common denominator. If you allow any discretion then someone who thinks he has the ability, but doesn't, comes out to pass and involves some other poor unsuspecting motorist. If you drive over the speed limit, you break the law and are liable for the penalty should you get caught. The police should not use discretion because they do not know the abilities of the driver, besides they should treat all drivers the same. As for revenue raising, it is your choice to break the law, your wallet is entirely in your own hands. The whole point is I want the roads as safe as possible for myself and my family so I support the police and the government in all their endeavours to achieve this, and I just have to accept that from time to time I will have to suffer the frustrations that you have described.
What other people think of me is none of my business.
Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817007

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:43

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:43
I personally feel that making 'headlights on' mandatory during highway driving would save a whole lot more lives on country roads, heck even on urban streets.

I'm constantly amazed by how many don't turn their lights on when it's dull, raining, low light etc . . . how much better people can not only judge distances more easily, but you can actually SEE a car approaching from either a great distance, or just 50m behind in your rearview etc.

Disallowing a little over a posted limit when safe to overtake is a bit like posting excessively low limits on decent urban roads.
The consequences can be more counterproductive, with more time distance spent on the wrong side of the road, or too much looking at your speedo instead of the surroundings.

A little over ? Let's say 10% of posted seems reasonable, and that's what tolerances used to be.
2
FollowupID: 817012

Follow Up By: Shaker - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:45

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:45
By the way, like most I do exceed the speed limit, but I don't whinge if I get caught.

0
FollowupID: 817013

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 19:56

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 19:56
Sorry Idler I wasn't talking about my common sense, or lack of it, I was talking about the application of driving rules requiring common sense. The laws are clear, but like all laws they need to be applied with intelligence taking into account circumstances. That's how laws work at every level - from theft right through to murder.
0
FollowupID: 817033

Follow Up By: Idler Chris - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 22:52

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 22:52
Hi again Bazooka. What do you mean by " all laws they need to be applied with intelligence taking into account circumstances"? You either steal or you don't, you either murder someone or you don't, and you either drive over the posted speed limit or you don't. There are no shades of grey, it is quite black and white. It is the same as being pregnant, you either are or are not pregnant. There is no intelligence required to be exercised, you either did the deed or you did not. And if you do the deed (break the law) and the police catch you, you will face the prescribed penalty and so you should. Laws have to be black and white because the intelligence of the masses varies greatly. Look at the penalties for drink driving. If you are over the limit by only .0000000001 you are still over and guilty, there is no leeway.
What other people think of me is none of my business.
Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817043

Follow Up By: Echucan Bob - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 23:30

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 23:30
Idler Chris,

unfortunately the legislators seem to be anal retentives like you.

Let's not forget that the purpose of road rules is to reduce the road toll and make roads safe.

There are many factors that contribute to fatalities: stupidity, aggression, impairment due to drugs, alcohol, excessive age and youth, poor roads, inexperience, vehicle factors, falling asleep.

Doing 103 in a 100 zone is so far behind the other causes its ridiculous.

Because police/legislators find it easy to measure speed and have the incentive of gaining revenue from doing so, they over-estimate this factor as a contributor to the road toll.

Bob (who proudly never drives at the limit, and at age 60 has never had a crash)
0
FollowupID: 817045

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 00:44

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 00:44
I must admit I've never come across that simplistic approach to the law Idler, and I'm thankful that our courts don't appear to have either. You can be technically in breech of laws but be found not guilty, just as you can be found guilty but not penalised - all based on a variety of mitigating circumstances presented to the court. Many a case has been thrown out by judges because they deemed the charge to be vexatious, overly officious or not in the spirit of the law.

I'm surprised you aren't aware of these basic truths. Here's a simple example. Your bicycle is knocked off. A few days later you see it in someone's yard and decide you'll take it back. You have no right in law to enter their property and do so and could be prosecuted but most courts would apply leniency if you were charged.
0
FollowupID: 817049

Follow Up By: Idler Chris - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:52

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:52
Bazooka, The courts job is to look into the circumstances of each case and make a valued judgement as you quite rightly point out and this is the way it should be.
What I believe this discussion is about is what do the police do. I believe their job is to police the law as it is enacted. That means if the speed limit is 100 and you are doing 101 you are breaking the law and they should be obliged to act. Here in Vic the law is also that the police are to allow 3 kpm for speedo error so in this State you have to be doing 104 to be booked. It is the parliament that enact laws and the police who police them. It is not the job of the police to place their interruptation of the laws enacted by the parliament.
Now the police are not silly, or at least most of them. If, in Vic, they were to sit behind a tree and ping everybody doing over 103 kph in a 100 zone they are going to have a lot of unhappy motorists some of whom will elect to go to court and as you rightly point out the judge will look at the circumstances and I dare say throw many of them out which is the job he is paid to do. Now what do you think will happen to the copper who is always going to court and losing so many cases. I suggest his superiors will pull him aside and have a whisper in his shell pink. What this effectively does is to cause the police to make a judgement as to how would the courts view any infringement of the law that they see and act accordingly. As the police are humans they will not always get it right. My whole point is that if you break the law you are putting yourself in the position that some other human, who may see things differently to you, has to decide whether to book you or not. If he or she decides to book you you have no one to blame but yourself, it is unreasonable to expect that police think and see things the same as you, we are all different, thank heavens
What other people think of me is none of my business.
Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817119

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 12:39

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 12:39
Application of laws, any laws, requires common sense by all those involved Idler. Police have to make judgement calls all the time. If they, and the courts, followed the letter of the law jails would be full and our "budget crisis" would disappear in a flash. Fortunately this isn't the case.

Heard a senior "copper" on radio answering traffic questions and he basically said the same thing. To paraphrase him: "we could be booking every second motorist, cyclist and pedestrian for minor offences but we have to apply common sense." Law in general wouldn't work if it was applied as strictly as you seem to think it should.

You also seem to think that police don't have discretionary powers. You're wrong. Depending on the infraction they can give a motorist a warning, a notice to attend, or an on the spot fine. For example the officious cop who booked a bloke in Sydney a while back for a quick toot of his horn and wave to a friend could easily have given the bloke a warning. Strictly the "offender" had broken a traffic law but I think many people would agree that he had a right to whinge.

It's interesting to me that the application of the law in regard to speeding appears to be different in Vic - assuming the chatter is accurate, I don't know the facts. In my experience NSW and the ACT do give some leeway in regard to speeding and I applaud their common sense in doing so.

1
FollowupID: 817125

Reply By: The Explorer - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:19

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:19
Not again ...Police enforcing the law..people whinging about it ...BOOORIIING ...got any Aussie travel/camping related subject matter ?

Cheer
Greg
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 533520

Follow Up By: Shaker - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:38

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:38
Well said!
0
FollowupID: 816898

Follow Up By: Top End Az - Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:53

Saturday, May 31, 2014 at 21:53
Brainwashed
0
FollowupID: 816899

Follow Up By: The Explorer - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 01:03

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 01:03
Unwashed..
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 816904

Follow Up By: Bigfish - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 04:07

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 04:07
So travel has nothing to do with driving or road rules?

Bet you,d be a real barrel of laughs on a camping trip....
0
FollowupID: 816905

Follow Up By: Freshstart - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 07:30

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 07:30
I don't have any problems with the police enforcing the road rules. Go for it.

I believe that those who winge are the ones breaking the rules. And the louder the winge, the greater the tag.
0
FollowupID: 816907

Follow Up By: MactrolPod - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:52

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:52
This poses some interesting scenarios.
What do you do if in the action of passing a slower vehicle and you need to get back in the left lane urgently, do you brake and try to slot back in or accelerate and get out of trouble that way?
As we all know some times we have made a mistake and had a lapse of judgement, but also it can be completely out of our control and we need to react with a positive solution.
If you were in a stream of cars slotting back in can be a hair-raising experience for all involved, worse if the vehicle being passed tries to look after themselves by slowing down.
If I can I will chose to exceed the posted limit without a doubt if that is deemed the safest in the split second decision process.
Its a big country and we need good road skills to "travel'' to our "camping" destination Explorer. We are on the road a long time!
0
FollowupID: 816908

Follow Up By: Freshstart - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:42

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:42
But the difference would be if you got booked would you; 1. blame the police, 2. blame the Government or 3. just cop it. I have been booked but I have never called it revenue raising.

And doesn't it annoy you when they do slow down and take the spot you had in your mind as a safety spot to jump into. Before even starting to overtake I have the spot to get back into already planned and note any alternatives.

No one forces anyone to overtake so if you get hung out to dry and either get booked or blocked it was your choice to take the chance of being put into that position. It's a judgement call and I find that it's always better to err on the side of maturity and safety.
0
FollowupID: 816912

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:48

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:48
"But the difference would be if you got booked would you; 1. blame the police, 2. blame the Government or 3. just cop it. I have been booked but I have never called it revenue raising."
If I was getting booked for slightly breaking the speed limit while overtaking Yes ...Id blame the police , as it would be their choice to issue a fine..........blame the government for allowing something so minor be a prosecutable offence..........and have to just cop it, but call it revenue raising because it is? ??
0
FollowupID: 816937

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 14:01

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 14:01
Agree Hairy !!
GOVCO takes out liberties bit by bit, and we don't notice it until things look so bl00dy ridiculous, but it's too late.

Just look at the US now, they put Border Control posts INLAND, as an excuse to stop and search citizens at will . . . but a lot of yanks don't take it, they recite their 4th amendment which "prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures."

"Aim I being detained ?"
"Am I free to go ?"

You Tube has some great vids US border checkpoint refusal

It would be nice to be protected by such basic constitutional rights to protect us from draconian over-governing.
0
FollowupID: 816940

Follow Up By: The Explorer - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 16:00

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 16:00
If only...:)




Cheers
Greg
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

2
FollowupID: 816947

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 16:12

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 16:12
Ha ha Greg, I've seen those signs with 'your wallet' on them too :D
0
FollowupID: 816949

Reply By: Iza B - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 04:45

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 04:45
Safety wise, getting back on the correct side of the road is more important than a short time over the posted speed limit. They are the words offered by a copper running a Stay Upright course I did years ago. Governments seem to be using their own poor performance in road design and facilities as a way of making money. That money never goes towards improved road safety. If road safety was their overall goal, lots of overtaking lanes would stop the problem of someone needing to spend several seconds in the wrong lane trying to overtake a slower vehicle.
AnswerID: 533523

Reply By: Robin Miller - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:51

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:51
I resisted the easy call of saying that its just revenue raising for years - but provided we restrict this conversion to marginal increases over the limits the evidence is building that the enforcement of these sorts of things is doing more harm the good.

I.E. The nett impact of criminalizing people for small infractions appears to be causing more dead people in total when the unintended consequences are included.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 533529

Follow Up By: Echucan Bob - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 23:38

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 23:38
Robin I agree with you.

I said above:

"There are many factors that contribute to fatalities: stupidity, aggression, impairment due to drugs, alcohol, excessive age and youth, poor roads, inexperience, vehicle factors, falling asleep.

Doing 103 in a 100 zone is so far behind the other causes its ridiculous.

Because police/legislators find it easy to measure speed and have the incentive of gaining revenue from doing so, they over-estimate this factor as a contributor to the road toll."

I would add that by focussing on speed alone, police lose the respect of the driving public, which undermines their role in making roads safe.

Bob
0
FollowupID: 817046

Follow Up By: Member - Matt M - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 09:32

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 09:32
It is hard not to be cynical Bob. It is also hard not to come to believe that enforcement of road rules in particular seems to be aimed at that which is easy, directly measurable and (dare I say it) results in clear cut legal cases for fines (revenue raising by another name) rather than a change in behaviour. Like most here, if I'm caught, I'm caught; no sense in whining about it, but.......

Every day when I drive to and from work I see someone on a mobile phone. Not picking on women, but the mobile hairdressing salon on the way to work and to balance the sexism, a male with a beer in his lap on the way home. Fog lights constantly on regardless of visibility (just because it is night, doesn't mean it is reduced visibility). I am no saint on the road and don't spend my time really looking for this stuff, but I would see it just about every single day. So if I can see it, why don't the police? The cynical answer is that speed cameras are much easier, less subject to interpretation and therefore represent better bang for the buck; in terms of revenue if not actual safety outcomes.

Our police do a wonderful job, but I cannot remember the last time I saw an unmarked car pull someone over for any one of the infringements we see each day. How many times have you wished that the dork that just shot up the inside, overtook on double lines, weaved all over the place while texting, or sat two inches from your backside at night on a roo infested road suddenly saw the flash from an unmarked police car?

Mobile and fixed cameras do represent a deterrent for speeding, but I believe that the thought that any car on the road might be police just looking for general stupidity or arrogance (as opposed to the particular kind that leads to speeding) is a far better deterrent and maybe the occasional wake up call.

Cheers,

Matt.

2
FollowupID: 817056

Reply By: The Bantam - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:57

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:57
In regards to road safety, never belive a single word the police tell you.

They are always sabre rattling about enforcement and how a single Km over can be a killer.

the truth is that the variations in road conditions and the differences between vehicles changes stopping distance far more than the minute ( in engineering terms) changes in speed.

The police and governments are always trying to justify harsher and harsher enforcement, ( of anything) because it buys votes from a certain sector and brings in huge amounts of revenue for very little in the way of results.

The die hard hoons and habitual high range speeders, know the limited locations where police frequent, they know when they are there and they don't get caught often.

There may well be a "crack down" on speeding......but unless you are speeding in locations identified as "problem areas" (high revenue locations), your chances of getting caught speeding are fairly low, especially in low range speeding offences.

In fact these days unless you are speeding in identified areas, running red lights or drink driving, your chances of getting caught for any trafffic offence is very low...and the general driving behaviour reflects this.

cheers
AnswerID: 533535

Follow Up By: Iza B - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:15

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:15
The poor coppers are really up against it with the single k over can kill you bit. As I chided my learner driver grandson the other day for creeping over the posted limit, he noted just how lucky we were that we did not die on the spot. Quite a stupid saying when, every day, lots of people exceed the posted limit and get away without experiencing instant death. The Police lose all credibility when learners like my grandson see that speed limits are not necessarily the only way to prevent road trauma. I would like my grandson to obey all the road rules because they are the best way to get home safely, but kids being what they are, kids, stupid statements do not build respect for the police.

Iza
1
FollowupID: 816913

Follow Up By: The Bantam - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:44

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:44
serioulsy...how stupid do the police and government think we are.

They keep comming up with the same incredible road safety messages year after year.

If they came up with some sensible and moderate meassges and had an enforcement polcy to match they might actually do some good.

5km an hour over is going to make bugger all difference to anything.....either getting there, real situation stopping distances or crash impact.....that is the engineering reality.

Failing to look both ways, high range speeding, following too close, failing to stop or give way and a heap of other matters that these days seem uninforced....do cause accidents and fatalities..and every day.


cheers
0
FollowupID: 816919

Follow Up By: AlanTH - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:54

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:54
Well said Bantam. Cops in WA have a single thought in mind and that's speeding. Everything else goes by them without a second glance.
Top cop recently ranted (I've actually got a lot of time for him as mostly he makes sense and does things) about those drivers on phones and said that his officers would be instructed to look at the normally "discretionary" offences.
He meant all those infringements they normally don't give a stuff about....no indications, tail gating, careless driving like munching or drinking as you go etc.
I'm all for getting those total idiots off the road who charge everywhere at well over the limit, but overtaking as quickly as possible and returning to the left is just too sensible for those turkeys in authority.
Rules are rules and will be rigorously enforced, especially and only speeding of any kind.
AlanH.
0
FollowupID: 816921

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 16:37

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 16:37
I'd own up to be a 5km/h whinger too if done for that. Simple solution would be to allow leeway but drop the limits by 5km/hr. Come on down....
0
FollowupID: 816999

Reply By: allein m - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:32

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 10:32
May be we should go back to the beginning of motoring and have some one walk in front of the car with a red flag

Now this will solve a number of problems

road rage
speeding
road accidents
save the fuel
employ lots of people

I am sure there will be many benefits of this program

now with the cost cutting going on and less beds for sick people this will help with that as well

only joking

AnswerID: 533536

Follow Up By: MUZBRY- Life member(Vic) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 12:45

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 12:45
Gday
Probably just leave a lot of people with flags being run over...
Muzbry
Great place to be Mt Blue Rag 27/12/2012

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 816931

Follow Up By: allein m - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:56

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:56
lol did not think of that one lol
0
FollowupID: 816939

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 20:01

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 20:01
Got a laugh here too.
0
FollowupID: 817034

Reply By: DBN05 (tas) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:02

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:02
Afternoon SDG,

I like to follow the following rule

Don't do the crime

if you can't do the time.

DBN05 (tas)
I NEVER get lost, but don't i see a lot of NEW places.

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 533544

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:30

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:30
Since when has human error or avoiding an accident been a crime?
We're talking about someone having to break a speed limit....not a bloody bank robbery????? LOL
0
FollowupID: 816935

Reply By: Hairy (NT) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:39

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:39
Gday,
I reckon its about time they focused on REAL dangerous drivers, like stupid passing manouvers, inconsiderate drivers, people towing set ups that are too big for their ability, fatigue....just bad drivers.
Not trying to catch people out for breaking a rule. Or isn't that financially viable?
AnswerID: 533547

Reply By: Member - Rosss - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:52

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 13:52
Never yet seen speed kill anyone, if it did all your jet pilots and drag racers would be dead, its the way you choose to stop that does the damage.
AnswerID: 533548

Follow Up By: Shaker - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:00

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:00
I've never seen a stationary car kill anyone, think there's far more chance if the car's moving!
0
FollowupID: 816956

Follow Up By: Member - Rosss - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 19:10

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 19:10
Maybe you should read it again, there's no mention of a stationary car hurting anyone, If you use the brakes to stop all is fine, but if you choose to slam head on into something to stop that's when it might just hurt a little.
0
FollowupID: 816960

Reply By: allein m - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 14:03

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 14:03
Well Broken hill police are starting to crack down on people doing silly things when towing caravans ,

couple decided they were going the wrong way on the silver city hwy and decided to make a u turn and just past a crest on a hill and half way through they were wiped out by a truck heading to Mildura

they were lucky it was not one of the tipple road trains that use that road they would not have walked away from that

And there has been a number of accidents involving cars towing vans in this area so there was a bit in the local paper with police saying they plan a crack down


I am not having a go a people who tow vans this is what local area command have said
AnswerID: 533549

Reply By: Idler Chris - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:09

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:09
If you break the law you deserve to be fined. Laws have to be made for the lowest common denominator. If you argue that you are safe at speeds above the posted limit, you maybe right, but if you have the right to make that decision then in a free country like Oz so has everyone else for whom it maybe not safe. In one week I would pass hundreds of other vehicles within a couple of metres with a closing speed of over 100kph. I want, in fact demand, that the police ensure that everyone of these oncoming vehicles is obeying the law and are not deciding for themselves what is safe and what is not.
Think of this. You are passing a vehicle in a 100 zone at 120 and at that speed you will pass this vehicle and get back on the right side of the road before the car coming in the opposite direction. However maybe my 18 year old son is driving the car coming from the opposite direction and he assumes you are doing 100 and in in his judgement he runs off the road to avoid a head on. Not everyone has the same judgement as you. WAKE UP, you are not the only person on the road, obey the law and stop giving comfort to those who think they are above the law.
What other people think of me is none of my business.
Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 533551

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:47

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 15:47
"Laws have to be made for the lowest common denominator."
They shouldn't be, GOVCO should use (pre) existing perfectly adequate laws to get bad drivers off the road, retrained, and / or rehabilitated.

100, 110, 120 km/hr should not make a scrap of difference to such a judgement call . . . I feel if someone's doing 95 say, and you want to sit on 100 (or if posted 110) a safe overtaking speed of say up to 10% over should be allowable, as it was prior to lowering of tolerances to ridiculous levels.
I feel 120 is too fast in many (but not all) cases.

That said, this topic always gets a passionate reaction on boths sides of the argument.
1
FollowupID: 816946

Follow Up By: Shaker - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:05

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:05
Maybe because some of us have lost loved ones due to speeding drivers!

0
FollowupID: 816957

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:23

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:23
So your definition of a speeding driver is someone doing 103 or 105 while overtaking on a 100 posted highway ?

I assume not, but you, I, and every other decent motoring citizen should be concerned about people who excessively speed.
0
FollowupID: 816958

Reply By: Bob Y. - Qld - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:33

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 18:33
Was coming back from Barkly Homestead recently in a r'train similar to the one pictured. Had about 4 vehicles pass me on left-hand sweeping bends, with no more than 500M clear vision ahead. While they were passing, they would have had a 50M+ long mobile blind spot! but they kept going because they "knew" nothing was coming. Must have had faith in God, or some other supreme being?



As I've never timed myself, when overtaking a similar vehicle I did some stopwatch work a bit later. This road train was travelling at 90 kph, ie 25M/second.

A 200 series L'Cruiser took 21 sec. to pass, from when he indicated, to when he got back over the centreline. Some time later, a Prado towing a Jayco camper did his thing, same criteria as the previous Toyota. He took 38 seconds!!! That's not much under a km, and most of that on wrong side of the road.

So what I pick up from this is, if you're towing, you probably need 1.5-2 kms to SAFELY overtake a road train. And if you're not towing, hook in anyway!

Bob.

Seen it all, Done it all.
Can't remember most of it.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 533570

Follow Up By: Echucan Bob - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 23:45

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 23:45
Bob

Is it possible they used radios to communicate that the road was clear ahead.

When travelling in convoy we do this all the time.

Bob
0
FollowupID: 817047

Follow Up By: howesy - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 07:48

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 07:48
I remember getting stuck behind similar length doing 80km/h going up to darwin over10 years ago and even nailing it,, by the time I got around I was doing well over 160 and backed off to 120. There were no speed restrictions then on that road back then but even in those conditions I was still on the wrong side of the road for an uncomfortable amount of time. back then 140 to 160 was common place for many vehicles on that stretch.
0
FollowupID: 817051

Follow Up By: Bob Y. - Qld - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 18:23

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 18:23
Possibly Bob, but they weren't using ch 40, and no UHF aerials evident on any of the vehicles. Even from my elevated position, I could only see 4-500 M, and the truck would have caused a blind spot, for them, for 3 or 4 seconds...........enough time for an high speed oncoming vehicle to add a bit of excitement to our day :-)

Just wonder what these car drivers would do if the "sh*t did hit the fan"?

Bob



Seen it all, Done it all.
Can't remember most of it.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 817079

Reply By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 20:35

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 20:35
Sorry but I don't buy the safety angle or the don't do the crime argument either. It is so easy to fall foul of the law for any innocent reason such as the poor signage or confusing signage just to name two examples. The constant dropping of tolerances leaves people exposed when we hear people being booked for 1 or 3 over.

So the real question may well be are you safe from being booked as opposed to are you a safe driver. It is becoming more difficult to be law abiding unless you are actively driving 10 under because being right on the limit will almost certainly see you over. I really dislike where all this is heading but for a traveller visiting unfamiliar roads what are their real options?

It concerns me that overtaking has been made more difficult than it already is and I hope those responsible feel good about that. Interestingly I have never heard supporting evidence for all these changes, sure the road toll drops or whatever, but I have not seen stats to convince me that all this extra control has been responsible for the results.

When I see stats they point to speed, fatigue, not wearing belts but some if not all seem to have a strong connection with alcohol consumption as well. I always feel sad when people die on the road and certainly would like to see this did not happen but I suspect that selective use of stats is not necessarily providing an honest cause.

I suppose for my money I'll have to drive slower to make absolutely sure that I don't do the time.

Thanks for the timely reminder.

Kind regards


AnswerID: 533576

Follow Up By: Shaker - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 21:47

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 21:47
A camera can't differentiate between sober & drunk drivers!

0
FollowupID: 816968

Follow Up By: Dave(NSW) - Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 23:45

Sunday, Jun 01, 2014 at 23:45
"A camera can't differentiate between sober & drunk drivers!"

And a camera doesn't pull them over to find out and get the drunks off the road, it just takes a photo and sends out a fine.
GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 816973

Follow Up By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 07:37

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 07:37
For me it is a lack of understanding cause and effect. A person gets drunk and speeds the cause is most likely the booze and the effect is speeding. It is unlikely that targeting the effect will solve the problem. It will not make the road safer and the law makers must know that!

Kind regards
0
FollowupID: 816976

Reply By: The Landy - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 08:57

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 08:57
This issue is an old chestnut that seemingly rolls around everything so often…usually when someone’s father, mother, brother, sister is caught speeding…

This and prior threads revolve around the themes of using common sense, over policing, revenue raising to name but a few. And somehow police, most of whom are committed individuals, are frequently blamed for doing no more than what they are asked to do by the public – enforce laws.

So let’s stop blaming them and if you don’t like the laws head to your local politician not the local policeman to air you views.

The law is black and white for a very real reason, it leaves no grey area that needs to be interpreted. They are constructed in such a way that you are either abiding by them or you are breaking them. If it was left open for the general public to put their own interpretation or spin on road rules it would be a mess out there - giving rise to a whole new raft of complaints about policing, or lack of it!

Much is said about a common sense approach by the driving public and the police who enforce road rules. But what does common sense actually mean when it comes to applying it to road rules?

I'm betting everyone’s interpretation of what is sensible will be different - are we happy with that?

Besides I tend to find the common sense defence is applied when it suits someone’s own purposes and if it doesn’t they will do what they like anyway and justify why they did it later.

Is that what is meant by common sense?

And I notice much has been made (again) of the need to break the speed limit in order to safely pass a vehicle. The justification being a lessening of time spent on the wrong side of the road or the need to get back on the right side because a vehicle is approaching in the opposite direction.

This argument is flawed to the extent that if you can’t pass the vehicle at the posted speed limit within the distance available and without speeding, then it shouldn’t have been attempted in the first place.

For whatever reason there will always be someone on our roads that will be doing slightly less than the speed limit and there will always be someone justifying that it is reasonable to breach the limit in order to pass. I suspect it wouldn’t matter what the posted maximum limit was, be it 80kph or 150kph, the complaint would still be the same and there'd still be threads like this appearing.

And here is the crunch as I see it – it isn’t about a lack of common sense being applied by the perpetrators or the enforcers; it isn’t about poorly designed rules, after all surely we need road rules, for my mind it is about a lack of patience by far too many drivers on the road today…

Time poor people can tend to justify anything they do in the name of "saving time".

But even patience is something that will be open to interpretation. How much should we display before "common sense" is exercised, and are we happy that the next bloke on the road has a good handle on what is common sense, and how patient is he (or she!).

Yep, all very subjective and that is why we are stuck with black and white road rules for which there is no minimum or maximum degree of compliance. A breach, is a breach with consequences attached, usually a hit to the back pocket...

Infringing gazetted laws is a bit like pregnancy – you either are or you aren’t...
AnswerID: 533590

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:32

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:32
Gday Landy,
I agree with some of what you say but certainly not all.
You say "law is black and white for a very real reason, it leaves no grey area that needs to be interpreted." True......there is no grey area in the law but there should be in the policing of it.
Laws are made so they can be used when necessary and going out targeting people accidently and slightly breaching these laws isn't what Id call necessary? If its not dangerous or intentional what's wrong with police officers showing a bit of digression ?
With all the technology these days , police do background checks on drivers (and if they don't, maybe they should), and if they have a good driving record and not a serial speeder it should be taken into account as it was purely human error.
As long as you have different vehicles travelling at different speeds people will feel the need to overtake.
Id be in interested to see how many safe overtaking road train areas there are around the country following your rules or should all vehicles be speed limited to a a safe speed for all road users ,probably something around 60 kmh should do it.
Maybe all vehicles could be fitted with GPS tracking...........they could outlaw cruise control, to make a bit more room for human error and the Gov could automatically withdraw money from your account if you creep over the limit?
No tolerance with things like this when you have a human element is just ridiculous.
Do you honestly believe that a few kmh over the speed limit while overtaking increases the danger enough to warrant a fine? I don't.

I personally have a lot of respect for coppers and understand they are directed to target certain offences for whatever reason, Id just like to see a bit of the human element come back into policing.....not a quota system.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 816982

Follow Up By: SDG - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:07

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:07
Yeah patience and common sense are gone.
Sure a couple of k's over is nothing.
The other day when travelling to my parents place at The Rock, I and a few others got caught behind something sitting on around 95. Bucketing down with rain, limited visibility.
What got me was the amount of cars that decided it was time to overtake. Including those several cars behind me. These actually got in front of the slow vehicle about half a half dozen vehicles in front of me. Going a bit more than a couple of k's over.
Personally I was more prepared for the accident that may or may not have happened. Many of the oncoming vehicles through lack of visibility could not be seen until they were close.
0
FollowupID: 816983

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:12

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:12
That's what the laws are for........book the ones who overtook dangerously for driving dangerously.....not speeding.
0
FollowupID: 816984

Follow Up By: The Landy - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:58

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:58
I can’t really add to what I have said already on this particular issue as I gave it some thought in the first place.

But as I said earlier, laws are black and white with very good reason – you are either compliant or breaking them and there should be no room for interpretation. Police are employed to enforce laws, not interpret what our parliaments have laid down as law…

Society puts itself on a slippery slope when it effectively empowers our police agencies to interpret laws, thus elevating them to the powerful position of enforcer, judge, and jury. And that is what is at stake here, even though it might seem trivial to be issued an infringement for breaking the law “just a tiny bit”.

But crikey, that is another discussion altogether, and one which I will leave to others to debate...

If the laws do not reflect what the general population wants, communicate that with your elected representative.

And if you have been let off for a breach of the law by a highway patrol officer then hopefully you came away with the correct message.

But let’s hope it doesn’t re-enforce a belief that breaking laws, whatever they are, is okay. Humans being what they are will constantly push the boundaries, and eventually someone pays, and if they are lucky it will be with their wallet and not with their life…

0
FollowupID: 816988

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 13:10

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 13:10
If laws are expected to be followed precisely with no acceptations they should at least be written in a way that makes this possible.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 816989

Follow Up By: TTTSA - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:33

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:33
Hairy, they are. When you see a speed sign that shows 100. That means it is the MAXIMUM speed you are allowed to travel at. That is very precise, I don't see a * on the sign which may mean check the website for "terms and conditions". That 100 means exactly what it says with NO exceptions.

I don't see the confusion there or misunderstanding of what that road sign means!

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 817011

Follow Up By: bigden - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:49

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 17:49
i have to agree with tttsa .and someone posted earlier about getting booked 1-3 ks over. that just doesnt happen. you are given nearly 10% for error . if your fine says 105kph, your actual speed is 110kph or more. its written on your ticket, i know ,ive had them.

when i have got booked its my fault , no one elses. not the police or the politicians or the road authorites
1
FollowupID: 817014

Follow Up By: Bigfish - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 18:42

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 18:42
You are so wrong bigden. Got a mate who has a ticket for 103. Qld cops have been instructed to enforce a zero tolerance. Publicly stated in newspapers and on local news............Car manufacturers have a 10% tolerance in their speedos!!!

Ride a motorbike in qld and experience total harassment from the cops because of newmans VLAD laws which are an absolute crock....
0
FollowupID: 817022

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 18:57

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 18:57
Tolerances. Believe it Bigfish, it started with Victoria lowering theirs to anything over posted (ie 61 in a 60 zone, 101 in a 100, etc), they can and will book you . . . but not a copper of course, only the cold, inhuman speed camera, be it fixed or mobile.
SA followed a year or so after Victoria, and at the same time, we had a heap of perfectly safe 60 zones drop to 50.

I'm sure given time and thread views, a few here would pipe up to being booked for under 5km/hr over a posted limit, if you google it (speed tolerance fine) you find plenty on Whirlpool and other motoring forums.

Here's an news article (looks like QLD has joined the party) and one Whirlpool thread.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/lowering-tolerance-margins-on-speeding-offences-nets-queensland-police-8m-in-extra-revenue/story-fnihsr9v-1226746339957
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2116010

I'm sure searching for some other keywords would yield lots of other examples.

Yes, there's very little speedo error nowadays in modern cars, and if there is, it's usually in the motorists favour (ie speedo say 60, you are actually doing a few ks less) . . . I always drive to my GPS speed and know what this is on my vehicle speedo.

Remember, if you upgrade your wheels to larger rolling dia, you will need to check against a GPS as you may eliminate the error, or you may be going the other way, and doing 60 when you show say 57 or whatever . . . that could get expensive !
0
FollowupID: 817024

Follow Up By: bigden - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 19:40

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 19:40
i got a ticket in the wifes car a month or 2 ago (victoria) it listed actual speed ,110kph and the fined speed, 104kph.
almost every car reads under actual speed so i probably had 111-112 on the speedo. no ones fault but mine
0
FollowupID: 817029

Follow Up By: Hairy (NT) - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 19:55

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 19:55
Its all knit picking bullshit or commonly known as revenue raising in my opinion..........making manufactures falsely calibrate speedos is a bit like setting your alarm clock 5mins early!
If it was fine to drive an FB Holden at 110kmh surely its safe enough to drive a new Commodore with the new tyres, brakes , bitumen surfaces signage etc etc etc ......at 112?
0
FollowupID: 817032

Follow Up By: bigden - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 20:32

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 20:32
hairy, that would of been 68mph in an fb :) :)
that would of been flat out in the one i had
1
FollowupID: 817036

Follow Up By: Member - Rosss - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 22:12

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 22:12
That would have been downright scary in the one I had.
1
FollowupID: 817039

Follow Up By: Bazooka - Thursday, Jun 05, 2014 at 01:02

Thursday, Jun 05, 2014 at 01:02
Can't agree on the black and white comment Landy. Yes you have to cop it if you transgress (a rear light globe pops at night and you drive home unaware - there are hundreds of possible examples) but there are many occasions when a technical infringement is meaningless from a road safety or inconvenience to others perspective, which is essentially what road laws are for. For example after checking there are no oncoming vehicles I put my wheels over an unbroken centreline for a short distance to give a parked car more leeway or because I've spotted an animal on the side of the road. A following cop could book me or he could listen to the reason I provide and make a fair judgement. As I said to Idler above it seems as though at least one senior policeman agrees with me. The fact that police are given discretion within limits also says to me that community standards expect common sense application of the law. And by community I mean lawmakers, courts, police and the public together. In my bicycle example above would the police charge you with trespass and theft? Almost certainly not as long as you didn't break and enter.

Laws are generally black and white (not always as we know) but their interpretation isn't and I'd argue that community expectations would suggest that policing should also have a degree of discretion (which brings its own set of problems of course).
0
FollowupID: 817185

Reply By: Top End Az - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 21:01

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 21:01
Can't wait to head to Queensland in 2 weeks for our 1 month holiday. With the police booking you for 1kph over the limit and the online campsite booking system for the NP it should be a hoot.
If the cops are going to book me for overtaking someone whilst I temporarily exceed the limit well good luck to them. The fine will be happily paid as it is a small price to pay compared to my family being killed in a head on collision.

Speed kills is a mantra being recited by police and zombies.
AnswerID: 533623

Follow Up By: SDG - Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 21:37

Monday, Jun 02, 2014 at 21:37
Hey. Your on holidays. Why overtake that vehicle that is only five k's under? Sit back. Relax. Enjoy the holiday. Less stress.

Most likely you will pull over for a coffee, photo opportunity, Trow the kids out of the car for fighting,or whatever half an hour afterwards anyway. Then you will only need to overtake again.
lol
0
FollowupID: 817038

Reply By: howesy - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 06:54

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 06:54
If it's really about road safety then strict no excuses enforcement wouldn't be advocated rather officers would be told to use discretion.
How many of you have pulled on to the wrong side of the road to overtake a slow driver just to see them get smart and speed up,, u have 2 choices either brake and pull in behind again (if there is still a gap) or speed up more to get around. The longer you spend on the wrong side of the road the more the danger. I'm sorry but people like the one in the example should be targeted ( idiotic moron drivers) but you watch police would rather book the overtaking vehicle and state that it is no excuse. When NSW Police start leading by example and stop parking in no stopping zones to buy morning tea, doing illegal U-Turns and speeding just because the can and they feel like it well then I'll start watching my speedo instead of the road while on on the wrong side overtaking. bring back old time coppers,, they didn't have uni degrees but they had comon sense and obeyed the road rules leading by example.

AnswerID: 533634

Follow Up By: SDG - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 15:35

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 15:35
An officer here a few years back did an illegal u turn over double lines, in an effort to catch someone. He got hit. The brand new state of the art cop car was written off.
Last I heard he did get charged.
Same with the one who blew the motor on a brand new highway patrol car. I was shown that he was using excessive speed. Was probably trying to see how fast he could get i.
0
FollowupID: 817069

Reply By: Nigel Migraine - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 08:24

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 08:24
Just two points:

It is amazing isn't it; most of the rest of the Western world has higher speed limits than Australia yet those countries seem to manage perfectly well - obviously they have no idea about proper road safety?

If speed cameras were so expensive to install and maintain that they ran at a considerable loss each year... how many of them do you think there would be?

AnswerID: 533639

Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 09:45

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 09:45
Most other countries in the developed Western world have better roads!

0
FollowupID: 817057

Follow Up By: mikehzz - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 17:47

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 17:47
You know, I question all that. I've driven quite extensively in around 20 different countries and there are a few things I've noticed-

1)Their speed limits are generally only higher on divided motorways. On secondary roads the speed limits are the same or less than ours.

2)Their roads are not that much better, if at all, than ours. Some are way worse, cobblestones suck.

3)The percentage of rude and aggressive drivers in Australia is higher. I believe they are a minority, but it doesn't take many to leave an impression.

4)Australian truckies are far more aggressive drivers AND our trucks are bigger (except for the US). Not just a little bit, a lot. I'm not insulting them, just saying they are more in your face and sort of threatening for want of a better word. Again, a minority who stand out causing a misrepresentation. I apologize to the majority who might take offence. My son, just back from an overseas driving holiday totally agrees.

5)The safety emphasis in a lot of other countries is not so much on speed. For example, there are unmarked police cars in Germany that book people for discourteous driving.

Anyway, that's what I have noticed...take it or leave it. We could clean up our act by simply teaching and emphasizing the benefits of good road manners.
0
FollowupID: 817077

Reply By: Les PK Ranger - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:57

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:57
Was the road toll on NT roads any worse than other state country tolls when the NT had open limits ?
Do they still have open limits on some highways ?
AnswerID: 533654

Follow Up By: Slow one - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 13:50

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 13:50
Les,
they were talking about bringing back open limits on some roads, I don't know what has happened regarding that.

No the road toll was not any worse when the unrestricted limits were in. One thing though, if you did have an accident at speed, you had to prove you were driving to the conditions.

Many if the Territory sit on around 110 to 120 in the 130 areas, but many also travel around 95 to 110. To each his own.

As you said before it would be nice if people travelled with their headlights on. That makes one hell of a difference in picking out vehicles at distance or in bad light, including the sun behind them.

0
FollowupID: 817066

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 16:24

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 16:24
Ta for the info Slow one . . . I though I read somewhere a couple or more years ago that more mainstream limits were being introduced in the NT, but wasn't sure of the current status.

Yeah, peoples driving speeds can vary a heck of a lot . . . often in our convoys heading off on trips, one or two are slower older diesels, and if they go over 90 or so they chew through a lot more fuel.

So we all sit on 90 / 95 and it is noticeable, though not so much in the modern CRDs or petrol / gas vehicles, it can still benefit everyones economy a little.

Yeah mate, it is incredibly good having the headlights on, you can see approaching cars so much better and it helps gauge distance / speed / time for passing etc.
0
FollowupID: 817071

Follow Up By: Top End Az - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 16:40

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 16:40
Les
A 200km section just north of Alice Springs is currently unrestricted and being trialled. Several years ago most of the NT was unrestricted on the highways. Change of government saw a limit of 130 introduced.

The current liberal govt is looking at derestricting more sections of highway once safety upgrades where required have taken place.
The current government states that when the original unrestricted sections were revoked and the 130 limit put in place the road toll actually increased. Fatigue a common factor.

Most fourbies would be happy at 100-130 or a bit less if towing. However in a decent sedan it's quite safe to go higher. Problem is when fast moving vehicles come up behind slower moving ones. The closing speed catches some people out.
Headlights on, regular breaks, safe travels
0
FollowupID: 817072

Follow Up By: TTTSA - Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 18:32

Tuesday, Jun 03, 2014 at 18:32
Hi Slow one

Where did you get your info from about the road toll before and after?

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 817080

Follow Up By: Slow one - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:57

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:57
TTTSA

I remembered that was the case. I can still remember LOL.

Here is part of a newspaper clipping from the territory that I just looked up.

[Quote] Open speed limits were scrapped in 2007 and replaced with a 130km/h limit, in return for an increase in commonwealth funding. From that time until 2012, more people died on Northern Territory roads (307) than in the six years before the change (292).
0
FollowupID: 817098

Reply By: Alan S (WA) - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:24

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:24
While I refuse to get drawn either way on this, but there seems to be a large number of views around the use of common sense, and opposing views where the law is black and white.
Police are the enforcement arm and need to have clear guidelines as to how to enforce the law. I could not imagine the inconsistencies that would occur if we allowed Police the ability of interpreting the law. And that is not a reflection on their ability in the job that do currently.
The courts and judicairy are the ones able to interpret the law as well as make judgements.
With every ticket or infringment notice issued by the Police you have the right to challenge it and have it heard before a court.
That is the forum for the arguement of application Common sense or justification of why the alledge offence accurred.

Alan

AnswerID: 533703

Follow Up By: The Landy - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:08

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:08
Succinct and precise…

The other observation is how do we identify habitual offenders if they are not issued with an infringement notice.


1
FollowupID: 817117

Follow Up By: Freshstart - Friday, Jun 06, 2014 at 10:57

Friday, Jun 06, 2014 at 10:57
I agree with landy.

About the only sensible post on this thread.
0
FollowupID: 817317

Reply By: Freshstart - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:36

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 10:36
Question: How can they tell if a driver is fatigued? And then what do they book you with?

I didn't know that being fatigued is i the rules or even has a set of tests that a driver must pass in order to prove they are not fatigued.
AnswerID: 533704

Reply By: Bigfish - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 19:38

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 19:38
Queensland police will continue to operate state’s speed cameras despite $10m overtime bill

SPEED cameras will remain in police hands for the foreseeable future, with plans to outsource operations to the private sector still on hold.

Budget papers included four years of forward estimates for the Camera Detected Offences Program, with earnings of close to $175 million.

That money will be split between Transport and Main Roads, Police, Queensland Health and the State Penalties Enforcement Registry for administrative costs, trauma recovery, rehabilitation services and road safety.

Queensland is the only state where police have sole responsibility for speed camera operations which earn officers $10 million a year in overtime.

The biggest hurdle is understood to be the regions, where speed enforcement is not as lucrative as the southeast corner.

Queensland Police Union president Ian Leavers said their opposition to the outsourcing of speed camera operations was well known.

“We would prefer it was taken off the table altogether,” he said.

The budget also included $1 million for a fixed and point-to-point camera system in Legacy Way, on top of the $2.9 million allocated the previous year.


THE 6TH SENTENCE SAYS IT ALL.....MONEY AND NOT SAFETY IS BEHIND THE SPEED CAMERA.....Don't talk about cops and pollies trying to save lives when their priority is making money.
AnswerID: 533758

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 20:23

Wednesday, Jun 04, 2014 at 20:23
Yes sentence 6 is an interesting one !!

So too the figures re overtime, gee let's see, $10mil overtime, $175mil revenue, hmmmm.
Wish I had a biz like that !!

Good to see the $$ going into related depts though, at least not general revenue, but I suppose anything from fines down't come out of GOVCO general pool of taxpayer funds.

I believe cameras should be operated by Police, though I'd prefer to see them driving around, preventing ALL traffic infringements, as I feel the road toll would reduce considerably.
0
FollowupID: 817162

Reply By: bigcol - Thursday, Jun 05, 2014 at 23:27

Thursday, Jun 05, 2014 at 23:27
This is a funny topic.
On one hand we have the don't speed and you have nothing to worry about.
Plus the ones that say doing 95 in a 100 zone doesn't affect anyone and it's only going to cost you 5 minutes.

and on the other hand how about if you aren't doing the speed limit you show a bit of courtesy and pull over and let the people that want to travel at the speed limit by.

Same for the people that say i'm doing the speed limit in the right lane so I don't have to move over for anybody.
Truth of the matter is your speedo is probably out and you're not doing the limit.
Once again show some courtesy and get out of their way.

The arrogance shown by some drivers never ceases to amaze me.
It's simple show respect and courtesy to other drivers and everyone is happy.
AnswerID: 533809

Reply By: Dave(NSW) - Friday, Jun 06, 2014 at 09:22

Friday, Jun 06, 2014 at 09:22
If the Government were fair dinkum about speed being the main reason people get killed on the roads they would make all vehicles be speed limited to a set speed, But they're not going to make much money out of that.
GU RULES!!

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 533824

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)